LIVE NOW:
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 7, 2026******************
With hopes of a permanent truce being continually undermined by minor skirmishes and blockade infringements, it remains unclear whether this war is close to ending. And while oil prices gyrate from one Trump Truth post to the next, two weeks of Brent above $100/barrel (only just inching below as of this morning) suggests the market is not buying into the quick resolution narrative.
Though it is worth asking the question, what if the peace talks are truly different this time?
Joining ZeroHedge tonight at 7pm ET to answer what a post-Hormuz reopening means for markets will be former Morgan Stanley chief investment officer Adam Parker, who now runs Trivariate Research, and Michael Pento of Pento Portfolio Strategies. Parker and Pento will be hosted by Adam Taggart, founder of Thoughtful Money and regular ZH moderator.
Context:The U.S. and Iran are reportedly close to a preliminary peace agreement that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, ease shipping restrictions, and begin a broader 30-day negotiation process. Reuters and Axios reported the draft framework could be finalized within days.
President Trump paused “Project Freedom,” the U.S. naval operation escorting ships through Hormuz, specifically to give diplomacy room to advance. Officials described the move as a confidence-building step tied directly to ongoing negotiations.
Markets reacted as if a breakthrough is increasingly likely. Oil prices plunged 7%+ yesterday on the reports.
A potential wrench in the works, Israel remains eager to continue striking Tehran and claims it did not know Trump and the Iranians were ‘close’ to a deal. Israel has also continued bombing Lebanon despite President Trump’s April 17 demand that they stop.
Even assuming the best case scenario of an imminent reopening, baked-in supply disruptions may be sufficient to trigger a recession later in the year.
UBS projects US headline CPI will rise to 4.44% in May, driven by a sharp 12% increase in gasoline prices
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 6, 2026Might a post-Hormuz “peace rally” be short-lived upon the realization of a weak real economy, burdened by higher gas, fertilizer, and food prices?
Tonight:Tune in tonight at 7pm ET to hear from Pento, Parker, and Taggart to see how they are positioned into year-end. Right here on the ZH homepage, X feed, and YouTube channel.
Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 11:10By Benjamin Picton, Senior Market Strategist at Rabobank
The Little Red HenMarkets are bulled-up this morning on prospects for peace in the Iran war. The S&P500 and NASDAQ closed at fresh all-time highs and Brent crude prices closed 7.8% lower at $101.27/bbl. While some analysts are understandably wary of another Axios report touting progress in Middle East relations (and therefore lower oil prices!), markets are clearly not in a mood to look a gift horse in the mouth.
Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Ismail Baghieri told news sources that Iran is reviewing a 14-point American memo that outlines terms for peace. Axios reports that those terms include Iran giving up the nuclear fuel that it has enriched to near-weapons-grade (though, there is no detail on who they would give it up to), an Iranian commitment to never seek a nuclear weapon, moratoriums on Iranian nuclear enrichment, Iranian agreement to enhanced UN-led nuclear inspections, and a framework to gradually restore navigation through Hormuz and lift US sanctions.
The IRGC Navy announced via X that safe transit through Hormuz would be ensured. This comes just 24 hours after Donald Trump paused Operation Freedom, an initiative to free commercial ships trapped in the Persian Gulf that triggered exchanges of fire between Iran and the US and its allies – most notably the UAE. In a curious case of timing, Iran officially launched a new government agency called the ‘Persian Gulf Strait Authority’, which perhaps raises the probability that transit through Hormuz will not look as it did prior to the war, and that the Iranian tollbooth could be a concession made by the American side to get a deal done.
This has far-reaching implications for the post-war order. At face value, acceding to Iran operating Hormuz as a tollbooth looks like an American strategic defeat since it leaves the GCC and ‘the West’ in a worse position than prior to the war with respect to energy and other commodity flows. It also sets an uncomfortable precedent whereby other countries might get the idea that freedom of navigation through natural maritime chokepoints is no longer sacrosanct, and certainly no longer underwritten by US naval power for free. Regular readers will recall that an Indonesian minister recently did a bit of kite flying on the idea of tolling the Strait of Malacca, which would have sent a chill up the spine of most of East Asia and Oceania and drew quick (but polite) denunciations across the region.
On the plus side for the Americans, leaving Hormuz in nominal Iranian control would only increase the incentive for the GCC to build the infrastructure to send oil West to Israeli ports or Southeast into the Gulf of Oman. It seems awfully coincidental that the UAE announced that it would be leaving OPEC immediately after the US agreed to provide it with dollar swaplines, which are usually reserved for European allies. It seems to be the case that the UAE has answered the call to partner with the US and Israel because the latter two provided it with support versus Iran where others didn’t. This could mean that the UAE supports US ambitions after the war ends by pumping more crude than would have been the case had it remained in OPEC, but the question of where that oil flows and whether it remains part of a mostly fungible world market now looms.
This may rub Saudi Arabia the wrong way given that the Kingdom vies with the UAE for influence in the region and the two have been at odds recently in Yemen. Media reports that Trump’s decision to pause Operation Freedom came after Saudi Arabia suspended permission for the US military to use its bases and airspace to support it. Was this decision by Saudi Arabia informed by deepening US ties with the UAE?
There is also the question of how Europe fits in with a post-war order. France is now moving the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier and its escorts towards the Middle East to support a Franco-British led mission to support freedom of movement through Hormuz. British PM Starmer, meanwhile, is in campaign mode for today’s round of UK local government elections, making the pitch that he kept Britain out of the war while his opponents from the Conservative Party and Reform were of a mind to support the Americans.
This reminds me of the story of the little red hen:
US: “Who will help me to ensure that Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon?”
“Not I!” said France. “Not I!” said Britain. “Not I!” said South Korea. “Not I!” said Australia.
US: “Fine. Then I will do it myself.”
US: “Who will help me to re-open the Strait of Hormuz?”
“Not I!” said France. “Not I!” said Britain. “Not I!” said South Korea. “Not I!” said Australia.
US: “Fine. Then I will do it myself.”
US: “Who will help me to consume the cheap energy from Venezuela, the US homeland, and the UAE?”
“I will!” said France. “I will!” said Britain. “I will!” said South Korea. “I will!” said Australia.
US: ...you get the picture.
The point here is that the US is now in the business of securing physical supply chains and membership of the supply chain club brings not only privileges, but also responsibilities. Namely: the responsibility to meaningfully contribute to the attainment of common geopolitical goals. It doesn’t bear reminding that the US has been critical of NATO and the EU, and the latest US national security strategy openly questions whether political and demographic changes might mean that Western countries won’t be US allies at all in a few years’ time. One need only look at the political preferences of Gen Zs in those countries to understand the concern.
There are diverging reactions to this across the rest of the West. Canada under Mark Carney and – to a certain extent – France under Emmanuel Macron have taken up the mantle of official leaders of the opposition to Trumpism and the breaking of the liberal world order to remake the global settlement in a way that allows the US to respond to Chinese production and supply chain dominance. Israel, the UAE and Argentina are “all the way with Donald J”, Japan and Australia (who has just announced an 82% tariff against Chinese steel) are increasingly leaning that way as defense and economic ties deepen and geographical realities overrule the luxury of preference.
Which way various countries choose to jump will inform market access, investment decisions, supply chain access, cost of credit and all sorts of other important variables in the future. Choose wisely, dear reader.
Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 10:55Why yes they did: "GameStop's Highly Confident Letter from TD is contingent on the GME/Ebay combination being investment grade... and Moody's said it won't be": David Faber, CNBC https://t.co/uhZbUF72qn
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) May 7, 2026 GameStop CEO's eBay Account NukedGameStop CEO Ryan Cohen revealed on X that his eBay account was suspended after he listed a pair of "used socks" on the auction website, a publicity stunt that comes as he pursues a $56 billion bid to acquire the online marketplace.
Cohen listed a pair of used socks on his eBay account, but it appears he also listed other items, as the warning notification in the screenshot he posted on X shows: "You've reached the amount ($50,000) you can list this month."
on phone with customer support @eBay . please respond @eBay pic.twitter.com/HuUKxwivqN
— Ryan Cohen (@ryancohen) May 6, 2026Hours after he shared a screenshot of his used socks eBay listing on X, he posted late Wednesday that his account "has been permanently suspended."
I have been suspended from eBay pic.twitter.com/0vadYCQ6KE
— Ryan Cohen (@ryancohen) May 7, 2026Cohen's eBay ban comes days after he made a $56 billion buyout bid for eBay, funded by "half cash, half stock."
On Monday, Cohen joined CNBC's Andrew Sorkin to discuss GameStop's bid for eBay.
Sorkin asked Cohen, "How does the math work for you?"
That was the moment Cohen provided little information on the basic math, instead referring back to a press release, as well as the $20 billion financing letter from TD. That interview raised more financing questions, with some believing the takeover bid for the auction site was merely a stunt.
"Big Short" investor Michael Burry went from saying "GameStop Makes Its Play $56 Billion for eBay, Makes Perfect Sense" one day, to exiting his long GameStop position the next day, citing: "Wall Street does indeed mistake debt for creativity, and does so constantly. I of all people should have known."
As we pointed out earlier in the week, Wall Street analysts were widely skeptical of the financing deal, given that eBay's market cap is 4 times that of GameStop's.
GameStop's 13D filing shows Cohen's eBay position: derivatives, or option calls, represent 99.89% (22,176,000 shares) of its $EBAY position.
Certainly, Cohen is attention-seeking... Was the stunt all about trying to cash in on eBay call options?
Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 10:40Authored by Matthew Vadum via The Epoch Times,
Companies that legally sell recreational marijuana to adults are being sued in Illinois and Connecticut for allegedly not warning customers of the possible health problems caused by the drug.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs say these proposed class actions—four in all—that were filed May 4 in federal and state courts are the first of their kind. Federal and state court rules govern whether a class action gets certified and is allowed to proceed.
The lawsuits come after recent studies reported that marijuana use can change human DNA and cause psychosis, and that the drug increases the risk of death from cardiovascular disease, cancer, and other causes.
The newly filed legal complaints say that cannabis is highly addictive and can contribute to mental health disorders such as schizophrenia, suicidal ideation, and depression.
About 129 million Americans say they have used marijuana at some point in their lives. As more states legalize use of the drug, that figure is expected to rise.
The lawsuits allege that the defendants—Cresco, Curaleaf, Green Thumb Industries, and Verano—marketed recreational marijuana for its supposed medicinal benefits to generate billions of dollars in revenues, while not letting consumers know of health risks.
Attorney Jack Franks in Marengo, Illinois, said the plaintiffs are seeking damages for overpaying or being misled into buying the products.
They are also seeking clear product warnings that spell out the mental and physical health risks, Franks told The Epoch Times.
“It’s a legal product in many states, but it’s not adequately laid out what the risks are,” he said.
“They deliberately marketed highly potent products while concealing the known risks. Our clients deserve the truth.”
Attorney James Bilsborrow of New York City said the case rests upon “decades of gold-standard medical research establishing that cannabis, especially high-potency cannabis, is wreaking havoc on public health.”
“Rather than warn consumers about these well-established dangers, the cannabis industry, following the tobacco and opioid industries’ playbook, has denied the risks and marketed its products as safe or even therapeutic,” he told The Epoch Times.
The plaintiffs in the Illinois lawsuit are 41 consumers who purchased cannabis products, according to the federal class action filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
The legal complaint alleges that cannabis purveyors promote their products to “an unsuspecting public through a public relations megaphone as the antidote to ailments of all kinds, including, among others, insomnia, narcolepsy, over-eating, cancer, auto-immune disorders, neuropathy, pain, anger, boredom, sadness, shyness, irritable bowel syndrome, grief, and opioid addiction.”
The similar Connecticut lawsuit names as plaintiffs 18 consumers who bought marijuana products.
The legal complaints for the lawsuits filed in state courts in Illinois and Connecticut were not available at publication time. The plaintiffs’ attorneys said the state lawsuits are largely the same as the federal lawsuits.
A Verano spokesman told The Epoch Times that the company strongly disagrees “with the allegations and [intends] to defend the matter vigorously.”
“This lawsuit is part of a broader litigation campaign that plaintiffs’ counsel has brought against several multi-state cannabis operators, and mirrors claims that have been rejected by courts in similar legal actions against multi-state operators in the industry earlier this year,” the company said.
Verano complies with applicable state laws and regulations, including those related to labeling, testing, and warning requirements, the company said.
“The medical use and benefits of cannabis have also long been recognized by the states themselves, as reflected in the comprehensive medical marijuana programs that state legislatures and regulators have established and overseen for years.”
The Epoch Times reached out for comment to the defendants, Cresco, Curaleaf, and Green Thumb Industries.
No replies were received by publication time.
Tyler Durden Thu, 05/07/2026 - 10:25